No idea, but my guess is the opposite of what you're saying. He wants an out clause after 2 years should he wish to leave?
Either way, what's the point of the contract if one side can break it.
-
LIVE: St Kilda v Western Bulldogs - 7:30PM Thu
Squiggle tips Saints at 51% chance -- What's your tip? -- Team line-ups »
Recommitted Josh Kelly [re-signs with GWS]
- Thread starter The Warlord
- Start date
- Tagged users None
No idea, but my guess is the opposite of what you're saying. He wants an out clause after 2 years should he wish to leave?
Either way, what's the point of the contract if one side can break it.
You can say that about every player contract these days
kane249
Wibble
- Oct 27, 2006
- 52,130
- 68,680
- AFL Club
- West Coast
- Other Teams
- Sth Freo, Liverpool, Chicago Bulls
About the only relevance a player contract has these days is how much they get paid while they are still at the club, very little in the way of loyalty incentive
Snuffaluphagus
Moderator
- Sep 10, 2015
- 21,166
- 71,078
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
- Moderator
- #779
Contracts status matters. Just look at the last few years.
0 years on the contract - you'll get under market value
1 year on the contract - you'll get about market value or you can say f*** you, you're staying here (see Tim Kelly)
2 years on the contract - you'll get above market value or you can laugh at them for even bothering to try.
There have been plenty of times the last few years where clubs have held players if they have a year or more on the contract. A lot of the time its just best interest to let them go. Contract status still matters though, people just have to adjust expectations accordingly
0 years on the contract - you'll get under market value
1 year on the contract - you'll get about market value or you can say f*** you, you're staying here (see Tim Kelly)
2 years on the contract - you'll get above market value or you can laugh at them for even bothering to try.
There have been plenty of times the last few years where clubs have held players if they have a year or more on the contract. A lot of the time its just best interest to let them go. Contract status still matters though, people just have to adjust expectations accordingly
If a players happiness is tied to their security then the knowledge of having coverage for injuries etc gives one comfort and maybe a willingness to sign.
- Jan 19, 2017
- 993
- 1,554
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
- Other Teams
- Essendon, Geelong, GWS, Port
That is the phrase used in the radio interview linked earlier in the thread
- Apr 12, 2012
- 46,167
- 41,966
- AFL Club
- GWS
Ok.
Hadn't seen anything about length etc written anywhere.
Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk
Kelly wants security of a six year deal but the flexibility to move in two years if he wants to.
That form is basically saying give me security and flexibility or I'll move now. Do you want me or not?
If a club is in premiership mode they may take that as it could be the difference in a flag or missing out.
Thats not hard to understand.
- Mar 28, 2018
- 10,491
- 8,454
- AFL Club
- GWS
He cant have it though. A contract with a one way option isn't permitted.
Isnt it?
There are contracts with trigger clauses. If a player performs and acheives x, y and z then that triggers an extension. Why cant a player also benefit from a trigger of some sort?
The AFL player movement landscape is a moving animal. Players association is gunning for more player control.
Does anything like this occur elsewhere in more mature sporting industries in the US or Europe?
This is all hypothetical obviously.
- Mar 28, 2018
- 10,491
- 8,454
- AFL Club
- GWS
Other sports aren't reievant.
What would that hypothetical trigger be for Kelly? He isn't going to miss seiection if fit. A trigger clause on remaining injury free would be a real can if worms given players are often injured in the service of the club through no fault of their own.
A trigger clause if he wins AA selection again or a brownlow seems a bit silly.
An option to stay if he feels like it wouldn't be allowed.
telsor
Hall of Famer
Other AFL contract options have been for borderline players and have had things like "if he plays 10 games, he gets another year"
Obviously that isn't going to apply here as he'll play every game he can, but if could be the other way around...
"If GWS makes the top 4, the contract extends for another year".
Not sure why GWS would agree to this though (beyond desperation) as it'd make their long term salary cap management really tough.
Wasnt long ago we had no frer agency. Things change, the industry matures.
Other sports are relevant. The AFL looked at other sports in regards to free agency to provide examples and insight into how to implement free agency here. Likewise how contracts and potentially options have developed elsewhere would be considered by both the players association and the AFL.
The other issue is restriction of trade and the law.
Let us not forget Josh Kelly holds the whip here.
- Mar 28, 2018
- 10,491
- 8,454
- AFL Club
- GWS
None if that makes sense to me. Any contract now will be completed under current AFL rules. It's that simple.
telsor
Hall of Famer
Current rules allow for options. It just can't be (completely) one way.
Contract terms involve lawyers.
Lawyers find ways and means to get deals done and explore and exploit loopholes.
If not now then in the future.
You do agree Kelly holds the whip?
- Mar 28, 2018
- 10,491
- 8,454
- AFL Club
- GWS
- Mar 28, 2018
- 10,491
- 8,454
- AFL Club
- GWS
- May 16, 2014
- 12,163
- 15,984
- AFL Club
- Carlton
So you are simply ruling out the possibility of Kelly having an outclause? Even if both parties agree it's simply not allowed by the AFL rules?
- May 16, 2014
- 12,163
- 15,984
- AFL Club
- Carlton
If Kelly signs a 6 year deal with a 2 year outclause, maybe that just means GWS pay him less for years 3-6 if he stays. Hey, you want security and flexibility, but you get that by getting 200k a year less which we put towards Cogs/Tomlinson etc. And if you win a Brownlow in the next 2 years and we are contenders and you want to stay still, this is the deal, you're not getting a different contract deal.
Maybe he is considered uncontracted after 2 years only for a substantially better deal (>250k a year or >1.5mil over an entire contract etc).
I have no idea what the truth is here but I find it very difficult to believe that a 2-4 set up is not just allowed whatsoever. That's the only thing I`m arguing here.
Maybe he is considered uncontracted after 2 years only for a substantially better deal (>250k a year or >1.5mil over an entire contract etc).
I have no idea what the truth is here but I find it very difficult to believe that a 2-4 set up is not just allowed whatsoever. That's the only thing I`m arguing here.
- May 16, 2014
- 12,163
- 15,984
- AFL Club
- Carlton
The deal is only not allowed if it's one way. Plenty of hypothetical two way scenarios.
- Mar 28, 2018
- 10,491
- 8,454
- AFL Club
- GWS
With the 2 main teams that will be after him this year in North & Carlton having bad starts and needing to improve and improve quickly there will be Big money being offered and its going to be really really difficult to knock back this year imo.
Could we see the $10,000,000 for 7 years
Could we see the $10,000,000 for 7 years
Similar threads
